The tag alias #73882 ara_ara -> invalid_tag is pending approval.

Reason: implement a transcript field or go away.
ara_ara -text
tag is probably not suitable for meme status because there's no consistent visual element, and no associated calendar date.

May be missing something but the majority of posts in that listed search do include "ara ara" as text indicating ether as something spoken(dialogue ~ speech tropes on the wiki) or sound(onomatopoeia).

this should probably be disambiguated instead.

ryu_deacon said:
May be missing something but the majority of posts in that listed search do include "ara ara" as text indicating ether as something spoken(dialogue ~ speech tropes on the wiki) or sound(onomatopoeia).

That's the problem. We really don't need more tags that are just indicating what text is in the image, as they said "implement a transcript field or go away". Posts under ara_ara -text are either missing the text tag, or are random images without text without any consistency.

watsit said:
That's the problem. We really don't need more tags that are just indicating what text is in the image, as they said "implement a transcript field or go away". Posts under ara_ara -text are either missing the text tag, or are random images without text without any consistency.

They are not random inconsistent images through, I just stated that they are ether a dialogue or a sound(also known as a onomatopoeia). A alias to invalid_tag specifically is not correct.

If this is accepted does it also give precedent for the invalidation of good_boy and good_girl?

ryu_deacon said:
They are not random inconsistent images through, I just stated that they are ether a dialogue or a sound(also known as a onomatopoeia). A alias to invalid_tag specifically is not correct.

And as was stated, we shouldn't be tagging thing just because the words appear in the image. The tags aren't meant for transcribing text or dialog in a post.

And there are plenty of posts where it's not dialog or sound, it's tagged just because:
post #4573253
post #4712491
post #4801488
post #5172388 (+ its 6 variants)
There are more you can find.

faucet said:
If this is accepted does it also give precedent for the invalidation of good_boy and good_girl?

Please, and thank_you. Also happy_birthday.

watsit said:
And as was stated, we shouldn't be tagging thing just because the words appear in the image. The tags aren't meant for transcribing text or dialog in a post.

And there are plenty of posts where it's not dialog or sound, it's tagged just because:
post #4573253
post #4712491
post #4801488
post #5172388 (+ its 6 variants)
There are more you can find.

Please, and thank_you. Also happy_birthday.

I presume then you want to invalidate every single tag implicated to dialogue and everything listed as a subset on its wiki as well as onomatopoeia and every subset there of? I presume also that you want to invalidate all the 'imminent' tags?

faucet said:
If this is accepted does it also give precedent for the invalidation of good_boy and good_girl?

Aren't they destined to be aliased to praise once they get cleaned up (which won't realistically happen) (see topic #39883)

ryu_deacon said:
I presume then you want to invalidate every single tag implicated to dialogue and everything listed as a subset on its wiki as well as onomatopoeia and every subset there of? I presume also that you want to invalidate all the 'imminent' tags?

We want to remove dialogue tags which is just tagging the presence of certain text. The dialogue tags that are worth keeping are the ones about how something is said, or what type of speech it is. So we want apology rather than sorry, and impregnation request rather than breed me. It also scales better into other languages.

ryu_deacon said:
I presume then you want to invalidate every single tag implicated to dialogue and everything listed as a subset on its wiki as well as onomatopoeia and every subset there of?

I'm not a fan of tags that simply indicate the presence of specific words or phrases. They inevitably run into issues when someone makes variations of the word or phrase, when the words aren't said but the intent is for them to be said, or when the words are said but the context of the rest of the image doesn't match up with the words. And other languages also throw another wrench into it.

Like with thank_you. The tag is supposed to be for when the literal words "thank you" appear in the image, but it already has an exception where it can be used when only the word "thanks" appears instead, so thank you can already be tagged on posts that don't have the words "thank you". Should it also apply for "danky" as a corruption of the term? How many people would know if ありがとう would or should be an acceptable variation for thank_you to apply? Remember the tag is supposed to be for the words, not the intent or meaning of the words as that would fall outside of TWYS.

watsit said:
I'm not a fan of tags that simply indicate the presence of specific words or phrases. They inevitably run into issues when someone makes variations of the word or phrase, when the words aren't said but the intent is for them to be said, or when the words are said but the context of the rest of the image doesn't match up with the words. And other languages also throw another wrench into it.

Like with thank_you. The tag is supposed to be for when the literal words "thank you" appear in the image, but it already has an exception where it can be used when only the word "thanks" appears instead, so thank you can already be tagged on posts that don't have the words "thank you". Should it also apply for "danky" as a corruption of the term? How many people would know if ありがとう would or should be an acceptable variation for thank_you to apply? Remember the tag is supposed to be for the words, not the intent or meaning of the words as that would fall outside of TWYS.

would a tag like thanking work? because its an action like apology

furward_thinker said:
would a tag like thanking work? because its an action like apology

That feels like it would end up depending too much on interpretation. The reason tags like thank_you are considered valid is because it depends solely on the words appearing, regardless of intent or anything else. We can all look and see the words "thank you" in the image to know if the tag should apply, but the intent of the words or the intent of an action aren't TWYS. Two people can look at the same image and come to different valid conclusions as to whether a character is thanking another. And it has the problem of other languages and cultures, where an action may be seen as "thanking" in one culture but not in another, or someone may not be able to read it, or it can mean different things depending on how someone translates it.